Connect with us

RSS

They Shouldn’t Ban Shechita, But Sure They Can

European Union flags flutter outside the EU Commission headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, in this file picture taken October 28, 2015. REUTERS/Francois Lenoir/File Photo

One Shabbat, during the time I was studying for a Master’s degree in International Law and Human Rights, I mentioned the courses I was taking to a rabbi. He looked perplexed, then gestured towards his synagogue bookshelf loaded with thick books of Talmud and codes of Jewish law. “Human rights is all here,” he protested. “Why would you go to a university?”

Human rights and Jewish values often overlap. But unfortunately, sometimes they don’t. This was on stark display earlier this month, as the European Court of Human Rights upheld a ban on shechita (Jewish ritual slaughter) which was recently imposed by the governments of two regions of Belgium. The Belgium law requires that all animals be anaesthetized or stunned before slaughter, which according to Halacha, renders the meat not kosher.

Jewish and Muslim groups both protested that this requirement violates their human rights. In particular, they cited their right to freedom of religion, claiming that a ban on kosher slaughter interferes with their ability to live according to their faith. Many Jewish spokesmen were livid with the court, with the European Jewish Congress even releasing a statement saying that coupled with rising acts of antisemitism, this decision called into question whether there is a future for Jews in Europe.

The court’s ruling, however, was well grounded in human rights principles. It was based on two findings. First, preventing unnecessary pain and suffering to animals falls under a category of government responsibility known as preserving public morals. This makes ensuring humane slaughter a legitimate government interest. Second, this requirement that animals be stunned before slaughter was a narrowly tailored and proportionate method of achieving the goal of making slaughter more humane.

But what about the difficulty this causes for Jews and Muslims trying to observe their religious dietary laws? The court decided that the fact that this law interferes with some citizens’ religious observance isn’t enough to block it. The reason is that freedom of religion does not extend to situations where religious practice violates other human rights.

The right to religious freedom consists of the right to choose one’s own beliefs, and to practice those beliefs only in ways that do not violate the rights and freedoms of others. This includes the right of people to live in a society that upholds what they consider to be basic morals, such as not causing unnecessary pain and suffering for animals. So the right to freedom of religion does not protect religious practices that go against this principle. In the extreme, imagine a hypothetical religious ritual that requires torturing an animal. In such a case, the government could forbid it no matter how ancient, solemn, or important the ritual might be to members of whatever faith wants to continue the practice.

In practical terms, the Jewish community has a good argument to overturn the ban on shechita. We can maintain that shechita is humane, and causes no more suffering to the animal than what’s done in non-Jewish slaughterhouses with stunning. As long as our ancient method of slaughter is still within the parameters of what’s currently considered moral, there is no reason for governments to disallow it. While the court was right about the law, it may have the facts wrong about shechita in this case.

But protesting that we’ve been doing shechita for thousands of years — and therefore we must have the right to continue — isn’t a winning argument. Opponents will point to countless religious teachings, ranging from regulations regarding how women must dress, to unequal treatment of women in divorce, and to acceptance of polygamy and slavery in the Bible, as examples of deeply rooted religious practices that must now be banned in the name of human rights.

The rabbi I mentioned earlier was partially correct in pointing to his Jewish bookshelf. The Jewish tradition does contain many teachings that are in keeping with human rights. But in fundamental ways, the two are vastly different.

We regard Jewish values as ancient, timeless, and perhaps even emanating from God. Human rights were only conceived of within the last century, and come from our ever-evolving vision of how to make the world more free and equitable for all members of the human race. Since their sources are so different, it’s inevitable that Judaism and human rights will sometimes clash.

If we are committed to both Judaism and human rights, we need to take these conflicts seriously. The Belgium law may have exaggerated the suffering caused by ritual slaughter, and therefore given us grounds to oppose it. But how we deal with other intractable conflicts between human rights and Jewish values is a key question that each person committed to both must struggle to answer.

Rabbi Shlomo Levin is the author of The Human Rights Haggadah, which highlights modern human rights issues in this classic Jewish text.

The post They Shouldn’t Ban Shechita, But Sure They Can first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 419
Related Topics:
Continue Reading

RSS

French Foreign Minister Says Recognizing Palestinian State Defies Hamas, Despite Terror Group’s Praise

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot speaks to the media on the day he attends the European Union Foreign Ministers council in Brussels, Belgium, July 15, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Yves Herman

French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot insisted on Friday that President Emmanuel Macron’s push to recognize a Palestinian state defies Hamas’s interests — even as the terrorist group welcomed the decision.

“Hamas has consistently rejected the two-state solution. By recognizing Palestine, France is rejecting the stance of this terrorist organization and affirming its support for peace over war,” the top French diplomat said in a post on X.

However, Hamas praised France’s latest announcement, calling it “a positive step in the right direction.”

France’s initiative is part of “a political development that reflects growing international conviction in the justice of the Palestinian cause and the failure of the Israeli occupation to distort facts or suppress the will of free nations,” said the Palestinian terrorist group, which has ruled Gaza for nearly two decades.

Hamas also said that such international steps “represent political and moral pressure” on Israel.

On Thursday, Macron announced that France will recognize a Palestinian state and issue a formal statement at the United Nations General Assembly in September as part of its “commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.”

“The urgent priority today is to end the war in Gaza and to bring relief to the civilian population,” the French leader said in a post on X.

Macron called for an immediate ceasefire, the release of all hostages still held by Hamas, and increased humanitarian aid for Gaza.

He also stressed the need to demilitarize the Iran-backed terrorist group, rebuild the war-torn enclave, and create a Palestinian state that recognizes Israel and ensures regional security.

“The French people want peace in the Middle East. It is our responsibility — as French citizens, alongside Israelis, Palestinians, and our European and international partners — to prove that peace is possible,” the French leader wrote.

However, despite Macron’s continued efforts, his controversial diplomatic initiative to recognize a Palestinian state faces widespread public opposition, with nearly 80 percent of French citizens rejecting the move.

A recent survey conducted by the French Institute of Public Opinion (IFOP) on behalf of the Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France (CRIF) — the main representative body of French Jews — found that 78 percent of respondents opposed a “hasty, immediate, and unconditional recognition of a Palestinian state.”

According to IFOP’s survey, nearly half of French people (47 percent) believe that recognition of a Palestinian state should only be considered after the release of the remaining hostages captured by Hamas during the group’s invasion of southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

The survey also revealed deep concerns about the consequences of such a premature recognition, with 51 percent of respondents fearing a resurgence of antisemitism in France and 50 percent believing it could strengthen Hamas’s position in the Middle East.

France’s policy move comes after Spain, Norway, Ireland, and Slovenia officially recognized a Palestinian state last year, claiming that such a move would contribute to fostering a two-state solution and promote lasting peace in the region.

On Friday, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas praised France’s decision, calling it a “victory for the Palestinian cause.”

“This reflects France’s commitment to supporting the Palestinian people and their legitimate rights to their land and their homeland,” Abbas said.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned France’s announcement, describing it as a “reward for terrorism.”

“Such a move … risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became,” the Israeli leader said in a post on X.

“A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it. Let’s be clear: the Palestinians do not seek a state alongside Israel. They seek a state instead of Israel,” he continued.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also denounced the move, calling it “reckless” and saying it “only serves Hamas propaganda.”

The post French Foreign Minister Says Recognizing Palestinian State Defies Hamas, Despite Terror Group’s Praise first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 41
Continue Reading

RSS

Costa Rica Adopts IHRA Definition of Antisemitism, Joining Latin America’s Fight Against Rising Jew-Hatred

Part of an exhibit on the Holocaust supported by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). Photo: courtesy of IHRA.

Costa Rica has formally adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) working definition of antisemitism, becoming the sixth country in Latin America to do so as antisemitic rhetoric and anti-Jewish hatred continue to rise across the region.

Local authorities announced the decision following meetings with a delegation from the American Jewish Committee’s (AJC) Arthur and Rochelle Belfer Institute for Latino and Latin American Affairs.

Among the Latin American countries that have already endorsed the IHRA definition are Argentina, Colombia, Guatemala, Panama, and Uruguay.

An intergovernmental organization comprising dozens of countries, including the United States and Israel, IHRA adopted the “working definition” of antisemitism in 2016.

Since its adoption, the definition has gained widespread support from Jewish organizations and lawmakers around the world, and is now used by hundreds of governmental bodies, including the European Union and the United Nations.

According to the definition, antisemitism “is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

Beyond traditional antisemitic acts associated with the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the definition provides contemporary examples of antisemitism found in public life, media, education, workplaces, and religious settings — including Holocaust denial and modern forms targeting Israel, such as demonizing the Jewish state and denying its right to exist.

Jewish organizations hailed Costa Rica’s recent decision as a significant milestone in the global fight against Jew-hatred, amid a worldwide surge in antisemitism following the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.

“We are grateful that Costa Rica has joined the growing number of nations that view the IHRA definition as an essential guidepost to recognize antisemitism in its various forms so it can be properly addressed,” Dina Siegel Vann, director of AJC’s Institute for Latin American Affairs, said in a statement.

“We urge all nations to take this important step to protect their Jewish communities and uphold their Democratic values,” she continued.

Gilbert Meltzer, president of Costa Rica’s Jewish Community, commended the government’s decision to “support morality and combat discrimination.”

“The increase of hate speech and attacks on Jews all over the world, especially after Oct. 7, demands ethical decisions and firm actions as this one,” Meltzer said in a statement.

The European Jewish Congress also praised Costa Rica’s latest move, describing it as “a timely and courageous step” amid a rising climate of hostility against Jews.

“Defining hate is the first step to combating it. A principled move that must inspire others,” the statement read.

The post Costa Rica Adopts IHRA Definition of Antisemitism, Joining Latin America’s Fight Against Rising Jew-Hatred first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 37
Continue Reading

RSS

‘Reckless Decision’: US Officials Blast France for Recognizing Palestinian State

US President Donald Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron react on the day of a press conference, at the White House in Washington, DC, US, Feb. 24, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

US officials were quick to castigate France for its intention to recognize a Palestinian state in September at the United Nations General Assembly, describing the policy as “reckless” and a move that undermines efforts to end the ongoing war in Gaza.

French President Emmanuel Macron, who announced the decision on X, published a letter sent to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas confirming France’s intention to press ahead with Palestinian recognition.

“True to its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognize the State of Palestine,” Macron said. “I will make this solemn announcement at the United Nations General Assembly next September.”

France, home to the third largest Jewish community in the world, will become the first major Western country to recognize a Palestinian state, after smaller nations more generally more critical of Israel did so last year.

Washington lambasted France’s announcement.

“The United States strongly rejects Emmanuel Macron’s plan to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly,” US Secretary of State Marco Rubio posted on the X social media platform. “This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace. It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7th.”

Likewise, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee slammed France for moving to recognize a Palestinian state.

“How clever! If Macron can just ‘declare’ the existence of a state perhaps the UK can ‘declare’ France a British colony!” he said on X. “Macron’s unilateral ‘declaration’ of a ‘Palestinian’ state didn’t say WHERE it would be. I can now exclusively disclose that France will offer the French Riviera & the new nation will be called ‘Franc-en-Stine.’”

Huckabee has long opposed the recognition of a Palestinian state. In June, the ambassador said that he did not think that an independent Palestinian state remains a goal of US foreign policy.

US President Donald Trump on Friday dismissed Macron’s plan, saying it won’t make a difference.

“What he says doesn’t matter,” Trump told reporters at the White House. “He’s a very good guy. I like him, but that statement doesn’t carry weight.”

Trump added, “”Look, he’s a different kind of a guy. He’s okay. He’s a team player, pretty much. But here’s the good news: What he says doesn’t matter. It’s not going to change anything.”

Israeli officials lambasted France’s plan as a “reward for terrorism,” arguing a Palestinian state at this time would become a hub for terrorism and likely a proxy of Iran, which has long backed the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas in Gaza.

“A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it. Let’s be clear: the Palestinians do not seek a state alongside Israel; they seek a state instead of Israel,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a post on X.

Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar condemned Macron’s “absurd and unserious” decision that Paris will formally recognize a Palestinian state.

“A Palestinian state would be a Hamas state — just as the [Israeli] withdrawal from the Gaza Strip 20 years ago led to Hamas’s takeover there,” he said in a statement posted on X.

“Israel’s attempt to base its security on Palestinian promises to fight terror failed entirely in the Oslo process,” he continued, referring to the 1990s peace initiative between Israel and the Palestinians that sought a two-state solution. “Israel will no longer gamble with its security and its future.”

Israel maintains that Palestinian statehood should only come as the result of a negotiated peace agreement that ensures Israel’s security and recognition as a Jewish state.

The French announcement comes amid ongoing hostilities in Gaza, where Israeli military operations continue following Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel.

Macron defended the decision to recognize a Palestinian state in a statement, saying that the proclamation underscores that France is “true to its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East.”

“We must finally build the State of Palestine, ensure its viability and enable it, by accepting its demilitarization and fully recognizing Israel, to contribute to the security of all in the Middle East,” he added.

The post ‘Reckless Decision’: US Officials Blast France for Recognizing Palestinian State first appeared on Algemeiner.com.

Post Views: 39
Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News